Bitcoin Forum

Economy => Speculation => Topic started by: pera on November 20, 2013, 12:27:21 AM



Title: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: pera on November 20, 2013, 12:27:21 AM
I didn't have the opportunity to watch this second hearing yet, but I would like to know your opinion.

Yesterday the results of the poll were:
Quote
Positive    - 38 (92.7%)
Neutral    - 2 (4.9%)
Negative    - 1 (2.4%)
Irrelevant (aka same old^2)    - 0 (0%)


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: pera on November 20, 2013, 12:32:33 AM
lol wtf is this!?

https://i.imgur.com/dhoM7Tl.jpg

why they always use the same keywords... fucking assholes


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: ScrapOfCat on November 20, 2013, 12:33:00 AM
And the reason for my vote, most of the stuff seemed positive to me, but i'm very disturbed by how determined they are that people shouldn't be able to "hide" their money.  As though how much money you have is just automatically their business. (I realize this is legally true, and I'm not particularly happy about that either  :( )



Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: NamelessOne on November 20, 2013, 12:36:17 AM
It was generally positive to neutral. It was more boring as some of it was repeats and there weren't as many zingers in support of bitcoins innovation. The Senators were more informed than the damn witnesses half the time. And the dumb lawyer was on a war against Bitcoin and trying to pump Ripple, she spewed false information and wasn't properly told off either, so she brought things down a bit. Overall there was still emphasis on innovations and the general fact that virtual currencies are to be part of the future.


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: pera on November 20, 2013, 01:00:26 AM
wow the first part of the hearing is pretty bad, still watching it, why do you think this was positive?  ???


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: porcupine87 on November 20, 2013, 01:56:26 AM
wow the first part of the hearing is pretty bad, still watching it, why do you think this was positive?  ???

No strong regulations incoming! One senator even said "maybe we should just leave it alone". Only dreamer believe that all politicians in charge would just enumerate positive facts about virtual currencies...


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: theonewhowaskazu on November 20, 2013, 01:57:53 AM
Where can I get a recording for part 1? I only got a chance to watch part 2.


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: wobber on November 20, 2013, 01:58:43 AM
wow the first part of the hearing is pretty bad, still watching it, why do you think this was positive?  ???

No strong regulations incoming! One senator even said "maybe we should just leave it alone". Only dreamer believe that all politicians in charge would just enumerate positive facts about virtual currencies...

Too good to be true. My paranoia says they have some hidden agenda.


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: NamelessOne on November 20, 2013, 02:14:22 AM
wow the first part of the hearing is pretty bad, still watching it, why do you think this was positive?  ???
How so? The Senator starts off comparing Bitcoin to cell phones in the 80s and how innovation is important. Experts might not understand it and all that but people doing it realize how important it is. Bam 15 years later the whole world is changed. The Senators themselves... aside from the "Bitcoin is Terrorism" idiot senator were pretty well informed and interested in the future. Also... they all kind of talk like this stuff is here to stay.


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: porcupine87 on November 20, 2013, 02:31:59 AM
wow the first part of the hearing is pretty bad, still watching it, why do you think this was positive?  ???

No strong regulations incoming! One senator even said "maybe we should just leave it alone". Only dreamer believe that all politicians in charge would just enumerate positive facts about virtual currencies...

Too good to be true. My paranoia says they have some hidden agenda.

I am a libertarian. I don't like the state. But I am not a maniac like Molyneux. Politicians are normal people. Some of them want more state some of them less. It's not like every senator is a marionette of the big banks which don't like bitcoin (I even would go so far, that not eben the last half sentence is absolute).

But I expected worse 6 months ago.


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: Parazyd on November 20, 2013, 04:57:15 AM
The US Government doesn't miss business opportunities.


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: pera on November 20, 2013, 04:59:12 AM
The US Government doesn't miss business opportunities.
really? because they still didn't legalized marijuana  ;)


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: the_sunship on November 20, 2013, 05:06:29 AM
The US Government doesn't miss business opportunities.
really? because they still didn't legalized marijuana  ;)

that's coming soon enough. In a few years you'll be able to get an 1/8th of sour diesel at walmart with your bitcredit card.


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: Buffer Overflow on November 20, 2013, 05:19:04 AM
They said they currently won't regulate. My guess is they are hoping Bitcoin will fizzle out, because currently the buyer has little protection against fraud. Which will hinder adoption.


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: TheFootMan on November 20, 2013, 05:54:36 AM
They said they currently won't regulate. My guess is they are hoping Bitcoin will fizzle out, because currently the buyer has little protection against fraud. Which will hinder adoption.


What ever was wrong with people taking responsibility for their actions? If you want to shop at a site, you should check their reputation first.

I do not agree the buyer has little protection against fraud. Please elaborate.


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: F-bernanke on November 20, 2013, 06:10:33 AM
They said they currently won't regulate. My guess is they are hoping Bitcoin will fizzle out, because currently the buyer has little protection against fraud. Which will hinder adoption.


What ever was wrong with people taking responsibility for their actions? If you want to shop at a site, you should check their reputation first.

I do not agree the buyer has little protection against fraud. Please elaborate.

+1

All that "buyer protection" also has massive costs attached to it.


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: adamstgBit on November 20, 2013, 06:16:06 AM
i just have 1 question about the hearing, who was that Chinese girl in the back? ... seriously who? just a random bitchick?


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: vokain on November 20, 2013, 06:42:07 AM
i just have 1 question about the hearing, who was that Chinese girl in the back? ... seriously who? just a random bitchick?

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/jinyoung-lee-englund/31/b39/35b

She is the Director of Public Affairs of our very own Bitcoin Foundation <3


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: Buffer Overflow on November 20, 2013, 07:57:02 AM
I do not agree the buyer has little protection against fraud. Please elaborate.

Well I've spoke to a friends (non technical ones) about Bitcoin, and the question that always pops up is "Who do I turn to if I'm purchasing an item and something goes wrong?"

With a normal non-reversable Bitcoin transaction, this is a problem.

Protection is expensive, but if we want Bitcoin to go mainstream, average Joe users will demand consumer protection, which could be done with escrow and multi-sig.



Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: mrjeff on November 20, 2013, 11:15:10 AM
I do not agree the buyer has little protection against fraud. Please elaborate.

Well I've spoke to a friends (non technical ones) about Bitcoin, and the question that always pops up is "Who do I turn to if I'm purchasing an item and something goes wrong?"

With a normal non-reversable Bitcoin transaction, this is a problem.

Protection is expensive, but if we want Bitcoin to go mainstream, average Joe users will demand consumer protection....



I always here this and all I can think of is what do people do now if they're paying with cash?  What's the difference between bitcoin and cash?  There are very few places where I use a credit card to protect myself and it's usually for accidental damage protection or something similar.  If I don't trust a company to refund me if something go's wrong, then I'll probably just find a better company to buy from..


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: Buffer Overflow on November 20, 2013, 11:50:40 AM
I always here this and all I can think of is what do people do now if they're paying with cash?  What's the difference between bitcoin and cash?

Massive difference. I have to actually hand it over in person.
If I walked into a store and purchased a book with cash, and the cashier didn't give me the book I would cause a huge uproar.

If I purchased a book on an online store and paid with Bitcoins and it didn't arrive in post, who do I turn to now?

Problem with reputation is a new store begins at 0, so the first customer has to take a leap of faith.


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: vokain on November 20, 2013, 07:05:54 PM
I always here this and all I can think of is what do people do now if they're paying with cash?  What's the difference between bitcoin and cash?

Massive difference. I have to actually hand it over in person.
If I walked into a store and purchased a book with cash, and the cashier didn't give me the book I would cause a huge uproar.

If I purchased a book on an online store and paid with Bitcoins and it didn't arrive in post, who do I turn to now?

Problem with reputation is a new store begins at 0, so the first customer has to take a leap of faith.


or the store has to take a leap of faith....
OR ESCROW IT LIKE SILK ROAD HAS TAUGHT US


Title: Re: [poll] US Senate hearing reception (part II)
Post by: mrjeff on November 21, 2013, 05:40:44 AM
I always here this and all I can think of is what do people do now if they're paying with cash?  What's the difference between bitcoin and cash?

Massive difference. I have to actually hand it over in person.
If I walked into a store and purchased a book with cash, and the cashier didn't give me the book I would cause a huge uproar.

If I purchased a book on an online store and paid with Bitcoins and it didn't arrive in post, who do I turn to now?

Problem with reputation is a new store begins at 0, so the first customer has to take a leap of faith.


OK - So what you're talking about is online transactions but people can and do use bitcoins to pay for things face to face.  Bitcoins are also being used to purchase digital goods and services with reputable retailers who provide immediate delivery.  This forum is sponsored by one, Private Internet Access.